Talk:Ranulf de Blondeville, 6th Earl of Chester

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Peerage and Baronetage This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage (assessed as Low-importance). Cheshire Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cheshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cheshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CheshireWikipedia:WikiProject CheshireTemplate:WikiProject CheshireCheshire articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Middle Ages: Crusades Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Crusades task force.

The title says Ranulf was 6th Earl of Chester, the article says 4th. Which is it please? --Jza84 |  Talk  21:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He was the 6th, somebody has mistaken him for Ranulf de Gernon, 4th Earl of Chester and made an good faith but incorrect edit. I will change it back 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 23:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't there a fundamental misunderstanding here? The "earlship" was created several times, as families died out, so Ranulf was the sixth earl if counting begins from the first earl of Chester, but he was the fourth in its second reincarnation. Does that make sense to anyone but me? --Malleus Fatuorum 23:14, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes, but de Blondeville was known as the 6th Earl in all references and history books and ours is but to report, not to rewrite all the references. The 3rd Earl inherited the title indirectly from his uncle, the 2nd Earl. Although the line was technically broken because of illigitimacy it did remain "in the family" so to speak. To retitle Ranulf de Blondeville as the 4th would conflict with the 'real' 4th Earl Ranulf de Gernon, 4th Earl of Chester and will confuse the bejasus out of any casual scholars. 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 00:00, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He is not known as the 6th earl in all references and history books. But I agree that it would be a good idea to establish some kind of standard for the naming of these reincarnations, as Ranulf is by no means the only example of this kind of confusion. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:26, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me about it. Try following the tortuous trail of Earls of Plymouth and try make any kind of sense out it. By contrast the Earls of Chester is a cakewalk, even with three of them called Ranulf. 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 00:28, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking about it, how about we reword the lede something along these lines:

Ranulf de Blondeville, 6th Earl of Chester^[1] born 1172 – died 1232, known in some references as the 4th Earl (in the second lineage of the title after the original family line was broken after the 2nd Earl) was one of the "old school" of Anglo-Norman barons whose loyalty to the Angevin dynasty was consistent but contingent on the receipt of lucrative favours. He was described as "almost the last relic of the great feudal aristocracy of the Conquest".^[2]. How does that work for you? 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 00:35, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need to say something along those lines, to tie everything together ... isn't there a wikipedia precedent for this? --Malleus Fatuorum 01:06, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There needs evidence cited for his being born in Montgomeryshire, Wales. Oswestry and Whitchurch in north Shropshire both claim to be his birthplace.Cloptonson (talk) 19:45, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]